(23.9.2016) „Our air force did not attack any civilian target or infrastructure that could be used by civilians,“ Brigadier General Samir Suleiman, head of the Syrian Army information department, told Sputnik.

„We attack only military targets and large groups of terrorists conducting thorough reconnaissance prior to the strikes,“ Suleiman stressed.

(…)

(…)

(29.7.2016) Hillary Clinton will order a „full review“ of the United States‘ strategy on Syria as a „first key task“ of her presidency, resetting the policy to emphasise the „murderous“ nature of the Assad regime, foreign policy adviser with her campaign has said.

Jeremy Bash, who served as chief of staff for the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency, said Mrs Clinton would both escalate the fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, and work to get Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, „out of there“.

(2.9.2015) Former CIA director David Petraeus is advocating giving arms to members of al-Nusra Front, an al-Qaida off-shoot, to beat Isis. That is madness

(2.2.2013) Last summer, as the fighting in Syria raged and questions about the United States’ inaction grew, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton conferred privately with David H. Petraeus, the director of the C.I.A. The two officials were joining forces on a plan to arm the Syrian resistance.

(14.5.2016) „Matthews: Her key decision politically which hurt her in the 2008 race was supporting the authorization for going to war in Iraq. How did she turn on that… How did she get to that decision. How has she reviewed it since?

Landler: First of all, She’s acknowledged that was a mistake

Matthews: What’s that mean, though, what’s mistake mean?

Landler: OK, she’s acknoweldged that was a mistake because she said she wasn’t given access to the full intelligence dossier, right?

Matthews: That’s not a mistake.

Landler: And the point is she didn’t read the full NIE that actually talked about whether Saddam had weapons of mass destruction or not.

Matthews: Well did he have nuclear weapons? I’ve got no evidence that ever have suggested we knew or thought he did. But they sold it.

Landler: That’s right. She sort of hung it on her being deceived by the administration when the argument is she probably didn’t do adequate due diligence to figure out the truth.

Matthews: Why did she want to vote yes?

Landler: I think it was a combination of what I said earlier, which is her own instincts, plus you have to also acknowledge, New York senator, post-9/11, worried about her own–

Matthews: Concerned about Israel, too.

Landler: Precisely. Worried about her own possible political future.“

(2.3.2011) Testifying before the Senate‘s Foreign Relations Committee, Clinton called for an end to the violence in Libya.

She also added that the United States had reserved all its options as it considered additional steps that might be needed to stop Libyan forces from attacking civilians.

(12.4.2016) During a telling interview with Fox News this weekend, Obama admitted that „failing to plan for the day after“ the 2011 U.S.-backed toppling of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi was „worst mistake“ of his presidency.

The admission followed similar comments made by the president in a lengthy interview with the Atlantic published this month during which he called Libya „a mess“ and privately described the failed state as a „shit show.“

Given that the overthrow of Gaddafi is „one of the policies cited by Clinton as one of her chief accomplishments,“ as Vanity Fair‘s Tina Nguyen notes, Obama‘s statements could be problematic for the former secretary of state.

(2.3.2016) The New York Times published two lengthy pieces this week detailing Hillary Clinton’s role in the 2011 NATO bombing of Libya. Both are important documents, and provide much insight into how, as secretary of state for the Obama administration, Clinton played a uniquely hands-on role in the war.

Sec. Clinton pressured a wary President Obama to join France and the U.K. in the war, the Times reported.

(20.3.2016) Although the Wikileaks transcript dates the email as December 31, 2000, this is an error on their part, as the contents of the email (in particular the reference to May 2012 talks between Iran and the west over its nuclear program in Istanbul) show that the email was in fact sent on December 31, 2012.

UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05794498 Date: 11/30/2015 RELEASE IN FULL

The best way to help Israel deal with Iran‘s growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad. Negotiations to limit Iran‘s nuclear program will not solve Israel‘s security dilemma. Nor will they stop Iran from improving the crucial part of any nuclear weapons program — the capability to enrich uranium. At best, the talks between the world‘s major powers and Iran that began in Istanbul this April and will continue in Baghdad in May will enable Israel to postpone by a few months a decision whether to launch an attack on Iran that could provoke a major Mideast war. Iran‘s nuclear program and Syria‘s civil war may seem unconnected, but they are. For Israeli leaders, the real threat from a nuclear-armed Iran is not the prospect of an insane Iranian leader launching an unprovoked Iranian nuclear attack on Israel that would lead to the annihilation of both countries. What Israeli military leaders really worry about — but cannot talk about — is losing their nuclear monopoly.

(28.3.2016) „Syrien ist eine andere Sache. Wenn wir in der Arabischen Republik Syrien jedoch erfolgreich sind, wird dies die gesamte Region buchstäblich verwandeln. Erstens wird ein weiterer brutaler Diktator einer massiven Verurteilung vonseiten des Volkes und der Opposition unterzogen. Zweitens wird der ganze Nahe Osten zum Besseren verändert, weil der Iran seinen Halt verlieren wird. Danach wird Teheran weder Israel bedrohen noch die Region destabilisieren können“, so Clinton.

(14.2.2016) Saudi Arabia and Turkey, the leading Sunni powers in the Middle East, view Iran, the leading Shia power, as a regional rival for power and influence. Right-wing Israelis view Iran as an implacable foe that controls Hezbollah, a Shi‘a militant group operating in Lebanon, a border state of Israel. Thus, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Israel have all clamored to remove Iran‘s influence in Syria.

„There‘s a lot of populism, because there‘s a lot of road rage. People believe the political and economic order have let them down.“

Clinton called his wife „a sort-of ‚answers person‘ not an ‚anger person.‘ I mean you feel anger, but, you‘ve got to be yourself,“ he said. „Just go out there and try to be the grown-up in the room.“

(…)

(6.5.2002) The United States has added Cuba, Libya and Syria to the nations it claims are deliberately seeking to obtain chemical or biological weapons.

Everyone knows full well that terrorism would not have spread through my country if it hadn’t been for the external support of well-known countries. It is no longer a secret that Qatar and Saudi Arabia have played a part in this, promoting their Wahhabist Takfirist ideology and their death fatwas that have nothing to do with Islam. They have bragged about supporting terrorism in every way, sending into Syria thousands of mercenaries, equipped with the most sophisticated weapons. Meanwhile, Turkey has opened its border to let in tens of thousands of terrorists from all around the world and has provided them with logistical support and training camps under the supervision of Turkish and Western intelligence. It has even supplied these terrorists with direct military support, as was the case in Idlib, Aleppo, and rural Lattakia.

24 Sep 2016 – Walid Al-Moualem, Deputy Prime Minister, addresses the general debate of the 71st Session of the General Assembly of the UN (New York, 20-26 September 2016).

Der syrische Außenminister Walid al-Muallim hat Katar und Saudi-Arabien am Samstag vor der Uno-Vollversammlung beschuldigt, Tausende Söldner nach Syrien geschickt zu haben. Dabei sollen türkische und westliche Geheimdienste ihnen logistische Unterstützung geleistet und Trainingslager zu Verfügung gestellt haben.

David Friedman claims Israel would remain 65% Jewish even if it assimilated Palestinians in Judea and Samaria;

Netanyahu, who in 2012 acted in a way that was perceived as him interfering on behalf of nominee Mitt Romney and against the incumbent president, Barack Obama, is interested in avoiding giving even the slightest impression of interference.

The Daniel S. Abraham Center for Peace, a prominent liberal Zionist Israel lobbying group, purchased a full-page newspaper advertisement in Friday’s edition of the New York Times, calling for the immediate separation of Israelis and Palestinians into separate countries to keep Israel as a Jewish majority state.

“Separation between Israelis and Palestinians is Essential. No separation today means a Palestinian majority by 2020,” warned the public service announcement.

The new 10-year $38 billion Israeli security deal with the U.S. enables Israel to budget for long-term defense plans and prepare for a future after the nuclear deal with Iran ends, said Israeli Maj. Gen. (ret.) Yaakov Amidror in a press call Thursday hosted by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA).

(…)

Der Sicherheitsrat der Vereinten Nationen befasst sich am Sonntag in New York mit der zugespitzten Lage in Syrien. Das Gremium solle auf Anfrage der USA, Großbritanniens und Frankreichs um 17.00 Uhr (MESZ) zusammenkommen.

(…)

Dies zeigt die Trendrechnung des Instituts gfs.bern im Auftrag der SRG SSR.

Zum Dritten entscheidet das Volk, ob der Nachrichtendienst mehr Kompetenzen erhalten soll. Bei einem Ja dürfte er Telefongespräche abhören, Privaträume durchsuchen und verwanzen, in Computer eindringen und Ortungsgeräte verwenden. Heute dürfen Menschen nur im öffentlichen Raum und auf öffentlichen Webseiten beobachtet werden.

The FBI documents do not reveal what Obama’s pseudonym was, or what was in the text of the email. The subject, “Re: Congratulations,” combined with the date (June 28, 2012) suggests it may have been about the Supreme Court’s ruling upholding the constitutionality of Obamacare.

The email was never previously released, with lawyers citing “presidential communications privilege” to avoid turning them over under the Freedom of Information Act.

(…)

(3.12.2015) Das neue Nachrichtendienstgesetz (NDG) gibt dem Geheimdienst zahlreiche neue Mittel in die Hand, die das Recht auf Privatsphäre beinträchtigen. Amnesty kritisiert insbesondere die Kabelaufklärung als eine Form der verdachtsunabhängigen Massenüberwachung. Amnesty empfiehlt deshalb, das neue Gesetz in der Abstimmung am 25. September abzulehnen.

(16.9.2016) Will der Geheimdienst eine Überwachungsmassnahme genehmigt erhalten, so genügt es, wenn er dem Richter entsprechende Vermutungen präsentiert. Der Richter kann ja nicht wissen, ob die Behauptungen stimmen oder nicht. Die betroffene Person wird nicht gefragt.

(6.9.2016)

Dank der elektronischen Stimmabgabe können Sie per Internet an den Wahlen und Abstimmungen teilnehmen und brauchen sich nicht mehr persönlich an die Urne zu begeben.

Diese neue Möglichkeit zur Ausübung der politischen Rechte wird seit dem Jahr 2000 allmählich aufgebaut. Deren Einführung ist sehr anspruchsvoll.

(11.November 2006) Als Softwareentwickler mit 30 Jahre Erfahrung in der Informatik kann ich nur Alarm schlagen und auf die grosse Gefahr hinweisen die mit jeglicher elektronischer Wahl verbunden ist. Bei so einer Methode verschwindet jede Stimmabgabe in einer Maschine, einem „schwarzen Loch“, und niemand kann überprüfen ob die Zahl die dann angezeigt wird wirklich stimmt. Die elektronische Stimmabgabe hat keinen Papierbeleg und somit keinen Beweis der nachkontrolliert und nachgezählt werden kann. Damit gehen geheime und demokratische Wahlen vor die Hunde. Das muss das Stimmvolk wissen.

Meinungsforscher erklärten, nach den Anschlägen in Paris und Brüssel sowie in den deutschen Städten Würzburg und Ansbach sei die Zustimmung zu dem Gesetz gewachsen.

Veröffentlicht am 22.09.2016
Watch as U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., a senior member of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, questions Secretary of Defense Ash Carter and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford during a committee hearing to review U.S. national security challenges and ongoing military operations.